The Andre Controversa Show Presents:Do Illegal Immigrants take jobs from American Minorities

Tonight we will have a round table debate about illegal immigration. The question is: Do illegals take jobs from American minorities? The two debaters during the first hour are Steven Camarota, director of research at the Centier for Immigration Studies, and his opponent is Martine Apodaca, communications director at the National Immigration Forum.

H/T to Lamar Smith of the House Judiciary Committee.

Second hour guest is Stephen Koh, executive director of the National Whistleblower's Center. He will be talking about his new book, the Whistleblower's handbook.

Host Andre Traversa, Co-Host Jim Lagnese.

The show starts at 7:00PM CST, call in at 949-203-8421 or stream here.

The Same Old Sunday Schweinerei

After a while, what else is there to talk about about? We all know what a fuck up Obama is, How screwed up the gulf oil spill is, how great Palin is, what a disappointment Palin is, how Tiger is going down the tubes, the continuing trend of losing privacy, the illegal immigration problems in this country, Islam, and it goes on and on, the same shit day after day.

You have to admit, my fellow bloggers, that we really just keep the shit merry go round turning. Nothing new here, just rehashing the same stories day after day with some interesting insight from time to time.

I know we mean well and and want things to change to fit our world view, but to be honest, where are we really going? Are we making a difference? We all can't be Sean Hannitys, Rush Limbaughs or Glenn Becks and it's not about talent either. The market is full of people like us, but I digress. I am sitting here on a Sunday afternoon, on father's day no less, with nary an idea of what to write about. It seems it has all been said dozens of times over to the point that everything starts to sound like talking points, whether or not it started out that way.

So here's my suggestion to all my peeps in the blogospheria: Talk a day or two off, have an adult beverage or two, talk to your wife and/or kids if so equipped, if not, call on a friend or family and if you are really hard up, call me. Whatever the case, take a break and lets see how long the shit merry go round lasts without us. My guess it's the journo-political version of the perpetual motion machine. It just keeps on keeping on, no matter what happens. If you are in my neck of the woods, you are welcome to stop by and I'll pour you a few fingers of some 18 year old scotch and we can bullshit about something more interesting like the meaning of life or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. At the very least we will get a lot more accomplished.

Thank you for reading this blog.

Andre Traversa Presents Libertarian Politics Live: Guests Lex Green and Charles Kuck

The show will air tonight at 7:00pm-9:00pm. Call in at 1-646-915-9887.

Lex Green

The First Segment will feature Illinois Libertarian Gubernatorial candidate Lex Green.

Second segment Charles Kuck, who is an immigration lawyer representing Jessica Colotl, a bright young Latino student whose parents brought her here illegally through no fault of her own. While he comes out strongly in support of the Arizona immigration law, Kuck gives some very strong arguments in favor of changing our immigration laws to prevent tragic cases like that of Jessica, who is in danger of being deported.. Host Andre Traversa, Co-Hosts, Jim Lagnese and Eric Dondero.


Thank you for reading this blog.

Courage In Tucson Arizona: Gabriella Cesito speaks out

A Huge H/T to Brother LL



She hits it out of the park.

Arizona Heats Up: Who wants Amnesty?

In a turn of events, a sheriff's deputy was shot yesterday. Report from KTAR and the AP:

PHOENIX - A veteran sheriff's deputy was shot and wounded Friday after encountering a group of suspected illegal immigrants who apparently had been hauling bales of marijuana along a major smuggling corridor in the Arizona desert- a violent episode that comes amid a heated national debate over immigration.

State and federal law enforcement agencies deployed helicopters and scores of officers in pursuit of the suspects after the deputy was shot with an AK-47 on Friday afternoon, and the search continued into the night. Deputy Louie Puroll, 53, had a chunk of skin torn from just above his left kidney, but the wound was not serious. He was released Friday night from Casa Grande Regional Medical Center.

I wonder if Wes thinks these are just hippie farmers? While Eric and Bruce Olsen want to legalize marijuana, it's not the harmless trade they say it is, or purely attributed to "hippie farmers" that Wes attributes it to. I would also submit that an AK-47 is not a zip gun either.

This underscores the seriousness of the illegal alien problems in Arizona and elsewhere in this country. Not all of them are coming here carrying posies and daffodils, just wanting to cut your lawn or wet nurse your kids.

While I think that the drug war has criminalized a lot of people, too many, that were just users, will legalization really bring peace? Will these drug traffickers become legitimate businessmen overnight? Who regulates the industry? If the government does, then they get to pick winners and losers just like car companies and banks. How does that work from a libertarian perspective?

Obviously the drug problem and illegal alien problem are not one in the same. Solving each one requires different measures, but the two become intertwined due to the mechanism of trafficking both humans and drugs.

As I have said before, with illegals, make the penalty for hiring them so extraordinary that no one will want to take the chance and enforce it. Can you imagine the penalties on Tyson Foods alone? We could pay off the deficit.

As far as the drug trade goes, that is another issue. It is my opinion that there will always be addicts. You can get them to switch or trade their addictions, but they always will be addicts. Where should the effort go? Would the money spent to put users in prison be better spent on rehabbing them? Studies show that only 3-4% are successful in the first go around. May be 10-12% on the second. It can take at least 3-4 go arounds through rehab before people get it. And even then, what is the substitute? Hopefully something a little safer.

The drug war has been a failure. Part of it is because we are dealing with supporting countries that are poor and drugs are money. Part of it is the culture they come from accepts a much higher level of criminal activity and immoral behavior. JMO. They accept criminals as legitimate authority, so coming here illegally is not even a traffic ticket to them.

If we wanted to win the war on drugs, we could. We have the military and technological know how to remove it off the map, may be permanently. The consequences of doing so are equally as troubling. Nature abhors a vacuum. What will take the place economically and politically of the drug lords and that culture? Coffee doesn't make as much money as cocaine, pot and heroin, and the history of Central and South America is such that most legitimate business are controlled by local oligarchs and international companies. They do not have the opportunities we have here for the little guy to start a business and to be successful. Part of it is their culture and the US bears some responsibility for supporting these multinational corps an oligarchs who have in many cases feigned being democratic, and we have seen the results. As much as I eschew socialism, I can see why a lot of these people run towards it.

What's the solution? Very simplistically, the regular folk in those countries need to be able to create opportunities for themselves, there. It requires a cultural and political shift in the countries they live in, and how they get there is beyond the scope of this post. I will say running to people like Chavez, Morales, or even Fernandez de Kirchner is in the wrong direction. May be the solution is mass immigration into these countries by people whose ideals are more aligned with free market thinking. How do they get there(The locals to a democratic and free market society)? What do you think?

Thank you for reading this blog.

The Idiocy and Hypocrisy of the Left

I like Arizona Iced Tea. I really do. I used to like the indigo blue bottled ginseng iced tea. In fact, it's made in my home state of New York, and not only that, on Long Island where I grew up. That's why when I read the news today that opponents of the immigration law in Arizona have started a boycott of Arizona Iced Tea, I realized how far to the depths of stupidity the left has fallen.

Leftist twitter idiots twittered non-sense like this:

"Dear Arizona: If you don't change your immigration policy, I will have to stop drinking your enjoyable brand of iced tea," Twittered Jody Beth in Los Angeles.

"It is the drink of fascists," wrote Travis Nichols in Chicago.

It's no wonder they are driving us into the ground. With idiots like this, America will be finished in no time. Travis needs to get a life. Fascists?

Arizona Iced Tea was founded in Brooklyn, moved to Queens, and now just moved to a new $35 million headquarters in Nassau County, where I grew up. May be a old school Brooklyn style education is in order heeah, if you know whad I mean, ya heeah me?

I feel for the company as they make a good product and it's shame they have to be subjugated to this non-sense by feel good left wing stupid ass uneducated jackassery of human beings. I am sure Reverend Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will be calling for the CEO to resign and continue the boycott if he doesn't fork over millions in walking money to the Rainbow Coalition and The National Action Network. May be they'll extort a few thousand cases of Iced Tea from Don Vultaggio. I wonder what churches these reverends preach at, and in Armani suits no less. You also have to wonder how ministers can be pro-choice...I guess you have to belong to their church...The church of the dollar.

On the other hypocritical, idiotic and jackassery front, we have silence of the philanderer. Where is William Jefferson "I did not inhale nor did I...have...sex...with...that...woman...Monica...Lewinsky" Clinton on the issue of all these "illegal immigration protesters" destroying property, making boycott threats to companies that have nothing to do with Arizona and the physical violence no less? The Fornicator In Chief is no where to found. May be he's off doing cigar training with some other intern. You better watch it Bill, you are on borrowed time with that bypass. Too much excitement is not good for you.

These past few days have really illustrated the stupidity of the left. If there is one thing that is good that has come out of this is that I am hearing about more and more people  saying the quickest end to the immigration problem is to end the opportunities of illegal aliens. In my mind this would mean something like a severe fine for any employer that hires an illegal alien, knowingly or not. I would make the fine $1 Million per illegal alien. The vacuum caused by the hordes heading back south would offset any possibility of global warming for decades and we might actually see our hospitals recover, and other social services like schools and prisons also have a burden lifted.

No matter what happens, Arizona has become the lightning rod for the ills that are affecting this country. It comes down to world view. We have two major groups: Those that believe that the government, the state is responsible for our wants, and needs, and that natural rights include things that are entitlements. The other is the side of life, liberty, responsibility, the ownership of property and the ability to amass personal wealth from work. To put it succinctly, one side believes that need should be rewarded, the other side thinks ability should be rewarded. Which side are you on?

Thank you for reading this blog.

AG: Court Challenge Possible On Immigration Law

From Newsmax:

Attorney General Eric Holder says the federal government may challenge Arizona's new law on immigration.

The attorney general told reporters Tuesday that he fears Arizona's new law is subject to abuse.

At a news conference, Holder said that the Justice Department and the Homeland Security Department are in the midst of conducting a review of the state law.

The Arizona law requires state law enforcement officials to ask people for documentation if they are suspected to be in the country illegally.

The attorney general says a number of options are under consideration including the possibility of a court challenge.

Sen. John McCain says Arizona had to pass a tough immigration law because the Obama administration has failed to "secure our borders."

The Arizona Republican called the situation in his state "the worst I've ever seen," saying ineffective border enforcement has resulted in drugs pouring into the southwestern United States from Mexico.

McCain told CBS's "The Early Show" that over a million pounds of marijuana were intercepted on the border at Tucson just in the last year. He said he's talked to law enforcement officials and believes the new law can be implemented "without racial profiling."

Under the law set to take effect in late July or August, it would be a crime to be in the United States illegally.

Whose country is this?

By Pat Buchanan at WND

With the support of 70 percent of its citizens, Arizona has ordered sheriffs and police to secure the border and remove illegal aliens, half a million of whom now reside there.

Arizona acted because the U.S. government has abdicated its constitutional duty to protect the states from invasion and refuses to enforce America's immigration laws.

"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act," said Gov. Jan Brewer. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created an unacceptable situation."

We have a crisis in Arizona because we have a failed state in Washington.

What is the response of Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully executed?

He is siding with the law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.

He has denounced Arizona as "misguided." He has called on the Justice Department to ensure that Arizona's sheriffs and police do not violate anyone's civil rights. But he has said nothing about the rights of the people of Arizona who must deal with the costs of having hundreds of thousands of lawbreakers in their midst.

How's that for Andrew Jackson-style leadership?

Obama has done everything but his duty to enforce the law.

Undeniably, making it a state as well as a federal crime to be in this country illegally, and requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they have a "reasonable suspicion" is here illegally, is tough and burdensome. But what choice did Arizona have?

The state has a fiscal crisis caused in part by the burden of providing schooling and social welfare for illegals and their families, who consume far more in services than they pay in taxes and who continue to pour in. Even John McCain is now calling for 3,000 troops on the border.

Police officers and a prominent rancher have been murdered. There have been kidnappings believed to be tied to the Mexican drug cartels. There are nightly high-speed chases through the barrios where innocent people are constantly at risk.

If Arizona does not get control of the border and stop the invasion, U.S. citizens will stop coming to Arizona and will begin to depart, as they are already fleeing California.

What we are talking about here is the Balkanization and breakup of a nation into ethnic enclaves. A country that cannot control its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.

The tasks that Arizonans are themselves undertaking are ones that belong by right, the Constitution and federal law to the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Homeland Security.

Arizona has been compelled to assume the feds' role because the feds won't do their job. And for that dereliction of duty the buck stops on the desk of the president of the United States.

Why is Obama paralyzed? Why does he not enforce the law, even if he dislikes it, by punishing the businessmen who hire illegals and by sending the 12 million to 20 million illegals back home? President Eisenhower did it. Why won't he?

Because he is politically correct. Because he owes a big debt to the Hispanic lobby that helped deliver two-thirds of that vote in 2008. Though most citizens of Hispanic descent in Arizona want the border protected and the laws enforced, the Hispanic lobby demands that the law be changed.

Fair enough. But the nation rose up as one to reject the "path-to-citizenship" – i.e., amnesty – that the 2007 plan of George W. Bush, McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama envisioned.

Al Sharpton threatens to go to Phoenix and march in the streets against the new Arizona law. 

Let him go.

Let us see how many African-Americans, who are today frozen out of the 8 million jobs held by illegal aliens that might otherwise go to them or their children, will march to defend an invasion for which they are themselves paying the heaviest price.

Last year, while Americans were losing a net of 5 million jobs, the U.S. government – Bush and Obama both – issued 1,131,000 green cards to legal immigrants to come and take the jobs that did open up, a flood of immigrants equaled in only four other years in our history.

What are we doing to our own people?

Whose country is this, anyway?

America today has an establishment that, because it does not like the immigration laws, countenances and condones wholesale violation of those laws.

Nevertheless, under those laws, the U.S. government is obligated to deport illegal aliens and punish businesses that knowingly hire them.

This is not an option. It is an obligation.

Can anyone say Barack Obama is meeting that obligation?

Rasmussen Results Tell The Story

With all the hoopla and hand wringing going on about the immigration bill just passed in Arizona, a Rasmussen poll shows that 70% of Arizonans support the bill.

This is no surprise. While the hollywood and left wing set decry the law, they do not have to live in Arizona where the consequences of illegal immigration are mote dire than getting your landscaping done cheaply.

There are real dire consequences there, like murder, rape and robbery, and also the toll on social services like healthcare and education. We are talking about illegal aliens. A wave of Obama's magic wand with amnesty will not change the negative impact on our society. All it will do is legitimize an underclass and create a constituency for democrats. No matter what they say, that is the real reason behind amnesty.

Arizona is the first to put it's foot down, with Sheriff Joe Arpaio leading the charge. I expect other states to follow suit.

For the record, The Right Guy believes legal immigration is a good thing. All of us got here from immigration, including so called native americans. The culture we have had was one of excellence, freedom and responsibility coupled with opportunity. This means we welcome those that take initiative, work hard, obey the laws, and live here responsibly. The reward is that people from other countries not only live a better life here and contribute, but they also move up socio-economically. This doesn't happen so well in other countries. Furthermore, allowing illegal immigration or granting amnesty does not send the best here. There is no standard, just that if you can walk across a desert, you can come here. What about a Korean Physicist or Indian Computer Scientist that does everything by the book and has to wait years? It's hardly just or fair to give someone a leg up just because they live next door and it suits the democrats political purposes.

The bottom line is that while we need to adjust our immigration laws to allow more people to come and live here permanently, and to get the best, we also have a responsibility to those already here to ensure public safety, and justice to those who do things by the book. American Exceptionalism demands that we do so, not lay out our flag as a door mat to those who couldn't give a shit.

Thank you for reading this blog.

Up Next: Grahamnesty

In an effort to continue the revitalization of Keynesian economic philosophy, Lindsey Graham is supposedly going to put forth an amnesty bill next month.

Lindsey Graham has long been the RINO strunza in the senate and a proponent of amnesty. He also is a proponent of cap and tax and he will be putting forth his own bill on the subject.

It's amazing such a piece of work gets elected, but that says more about the people of South Carolina than it does about Lindsey. We know what he is about.

This information comes from none other than Scott Brown, the debutante Republican from Massachusetts.

From The Gateway Pundit:

"Brown, in an interview with the Journal’s Neil King Jr., said the president was giving him a heads-up that immigration was coming down the pike and he should give it some serious thought. The senator promised to look closely at the bipartisan bill that Sens. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) are trying to produce.

He called me originally about illegal immigration, something that he wanted me to look at that was coming down the pike,” Brown says of the call, which also roamed onto other topics like basketball and financial regulation. “I told him and others that I will read anything and make a judgment when it comes forth.”

What is troubling here is that Obama would be confiding such things to Brown. May be it's derigueur, but I find it odd.  None the less, we are in for a run against the November clock where Obama and his cohorts will try to pass every crappy law to further the fabian socialist agenda of the Obama Regime. What is sad is that Lindsey Graham is going to help him. With friends like this, who needs enemies? A better question is, what is Grahamnesty and his constituents getting out of this? Is there a Tyson Foods plant in his district that needs more workers? Is his support of the cap and tax because he will get some bacon to bring home like Ben Nelson did for Obamacare? Or has he sold his soul for a promise that will never be honored like Stupak?

Right now we are being violated like the elephant in the above picture. When is enough, enough?

Thank you for reading this blog.

Bona Fides, Beliefs and Values

Several entries ago I said I would outline and discuss my values, beliefs and bona fides. For those of you across the river, the definition of bona fides is “a person’s honesty and sincerity of intentions” and/or a person’s legitimacy, I.E. credentials. Outside of my profile and blog header, those that read my blog entries may not know where I stand, or what values I have. At this point, I think I have to make them known so there is an understanding, particularly in regards to issues I discuss.


Life – Pro Life.
My view is that a fetus is a unique human being, with it's own unique DNA, different from either parent. It is an individual and because it is not anything other than a human being, not a frog, fruit fly nor a meat loaf, it deserves the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of property.

What pro-choice and pro-abortion types will say is that it's foray into the human realm does not begin until it is breached into the world. I would retort it is just one instance of potentialities in a humans life, just as is puberty, pregnancy, physical growth throughout childhood, and even death. It is not the defining moment of creation, but conception is, as this is when the potentiality of being human happens. Actually, if you want to get philosophical, that moment is the instant of intent on the part of the parents, but we are getting off track here...

To believe that the right of abortion is a right for a woman to control her reproductive rights is a fallacy. If that were true, why didn't she control it before she was pregnant? And even in cases of rape, how does that lessen the fetus status as a human being? It does not. It still is a unique individual.

In order for one to believe that they have the right to abort a fetus, they must believe in slavery of a sort, or hubris such that they have dominion over another human being in terms of that individual's very existence. Such dominion and ownership reduces a fetuses status to something less than human in their eyes. It has to...If it didn't it would be murder, to them. They must reduce the fetus to less than human for them to be comfortable with that dastardly act.

Just as no matter where you go the sky is blue, there are inescapable facts about our reality. In their case, they deny it, and in most cases, they put their very convenience before the life of another.

Another related retort relates to their convenience somewhat is they will assert, who will pay to feed this person? My retort it is the responsibility of the parent(s). Such is the case any and everywhere. I will also add that if that is the only condition of one being allowed to exist, why stop at killing the not yet born, why not the poor, why not the aged (or any other human potentiality that might be an inconvenience)? They can be an inconvenience too. Such false thinking on their part leads to a materialism that communists use to reduce us to our basic components chemically (basically our physical life form) and nothing more, so as to be able to do anything the state wants against us. Anything can be justified and usually is.

I usually leave these misanthropes with one question: If humans laid eggs like a bird, would they still believe that abortion is morally correct if they wanted to destroy their eggs?


Marriage – Marriage licenses by the government should not be called marriage licenses, but rather civil union licenses. Marriage is a rite and sacrament before god, and the government should keep out of it. The purpose of the government license is for property rights and other legal affairs that do not pertain to marriage as prescribed by the church. To that extent, the government of any state may decide to grant civil union licenses to whomever they chose (and some do) based on the sensibilities of their population, but churches are free to decide who gets married in their respective religion without regard to what the state does, and without interference by those (or the state) that oppose the churches views and doctrine.

Government – As small as possible, as low taxes as possible. I’d settle for the abolition of the IRS, and institute a consumption tax, so long as all other federal taxes go away.

Guns – Any law abiding citizen has the right to keep and bear arms if they chose, for whatever reason they choose.

Foreign Policy - Let’s see: We dole out foreign aid to people that hate us (a panoply of pan-arabic countries), support countries where only our economic interests are served (Saudi Arabia, China), but whose governments we abhor, we try to democratize countries where it either will not work, or there are not the necessary forces to make it happen by itself, and we allow politics to influence military decisions, as well as policy decisions, and in either case it leads to disaster. For instance, we pander to the Saudis because of their oil reserves, even when they personally finance terrorists that kill our citizens and soldiers. They are the epitome of back stabbing SOBs, and if we were both moral and smart, we’d divest ourselves of these people by developing our own oil reserves in ANWR, off shore and anywhere else here. Can’t do that. The enviro-terrorists in this country won’t let that happen. In fact, they hate any idea that involves current technology, instead promulgating windmills and non-existent means of energy, whereby putting us back 100 years because they don’t want the intention of polluting our environment to exist. I will continue this later with Energy, but you get the idea. Our values that we bring to politics and foreign policy lack a moral backbone. I think it is ok to help countries where the people are unduly suffering, but even there we get it wrong. While it is ok to invade Iraq because Saddam was a despot, it is not ok to invade the Sudan because of a despot. More people got shit hammered in Africa than in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Iran, combined. The shame of it is that Kofi “the feckless wonder” Annan, did next to nothing for his home continent. Of course that is de rigueur for the UN, which is the Organization of Feckless Peoples or OFP. It is more important to have good intentions than to accomplish anything. So, after our great Middle East democratization tour, what do we do now? We need someone in charge that has a strong moral compass. That does not start trouble, but does back down from it necessarily. We need someone where actions and results matter more than intentions by themselves, and results matter more than anything. Passing the same cup of piss around and calling it chardonnay doesn’t work anymore.

Immigration – Legal immigration is good, illegal immigration is bad. We need to punish the companies that hire illegal immigrants, deport when we can, and change the process of immigration to streamline it, and enforce it better.

Energy – For electricity, go nuclear, for transportation, drill here, drill well, and drill all the time. In spare time, look for other energy sources.

Religion – First, everyone has the right to believe as they wish, at least in this country, for now. For me, there is one truth and that is we are god’s creation and in that context, there are things you can do, and things you should not do. There is absolute right and wrong, and having opinions is fine. Judgement comes with the final exam.

Philosophy – I have always believed in an objective philosophy that there is right and wrong, and that facts are facts. I think this is why I like objectivism so much. From Ayn Rand:

Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.

Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.

Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.

The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.

In my heart, her arguments and statements ring true as anything I have read. Even so, she and I would disagree on a couple things. One, she was pro-choice. I am not. Two, she was an atheist. I am not. For me, my goal on a philosophical level has been to try to combine and rationalize Objectivism with Christianity. The problems I have had with Christianity, particularly my Anglican and Catholic background, is that it tends to be collectivist in it’s interpretations, and has become suitable to those whose philosophies are what I would call theo-socialist. Part of this is that both Anglicanism and Catholicism are steeped in tradition and orthodoxy. To quote Barbara Tober, “Traditions are group efforts to keep the unexpected from happening.” Emphasis on group, as it implies collectivism. To be part of a group, you have to give up something. I have yet to find a group where I agree with everything, but I find it difficult to follow doctrine in any group if I do not believe it or in it. I liken it to having to eat a shit sandwich. In Collectivism, everyone has to take a bite, some more than others. So in a sense, my beliefs in libertarian and objectivist ideals are to minimize the shit sandwich eating escapades, particularly from the culinary expertise of those outside myself. So, in the context of Ayn Rand’s statements of Objectivist ideals, I try to exercise them with the moral rules set forth through my religion, for which there are but three commandments: Love your god with all your heart, all your soul and all your mind, love your neighbor as yourself, and honor your father and your mother. A reduction of the original 10, but it covers everything just the same.

Background – Born and raise on Long Island, lived there until 2002. My father was the son of Italian immigrants, and my mother’s family background was much more diverse, with immigrants from England and Ireland in the 19th century and Danish and French Huguenot immigrants from the 17th century. There even is some native american thrown in along the way. Culturally, I grew up being exposed to an Italian-American experience. My father was fluent in Italian, but only spoke it when spoken to in Italian. Up until the 8th grade I attended Episcopal parochial school. Do not compare this with the current iteration of the Episcopal and Anglican Church, but more like Anglican Catholic. High Mass once a week, The Book of Common Prayer of 1928 and the Hymnal of 1940. Very strict, but without brothers or nuns. I attended W.C. Mepham HS after this, and went on to get a B.A. In American History and minor in Biology. In between then and now, I have had many different kinds of jobs and work, and it’s too much to list and discuss, but only to say that I have a lot of experience in different things, and an eclecticism that serves me better now than then. For the last 16 plus years I have worked in the information technology field, and I have since received a M.S. In Information Systems. I am Married, and I have 5 children. Outside of that, I like to ride my motorcycle, lift weights, and some point soon, start practicing Aikido again. I also like to Blog...

Thank you for reading this blog.